• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

tort law

Extracts from this document...


Introduction. For this piece of work I will be examining the principles of duty of care using relevant case law examples. I will be discussing the consequences where there is a breach of that duty. I will also give a brief explanation of statutory liability and highlight some if the controls on exclusion clauses at common law and by legislation. Duty of Care. Duty of care is a legal obligation that is imposed on any individual but only when they adhere to a reasonable standard of care while performing any acts that could harm others. A duty of care must clearly be recognised in order to proceed with an action in negligence. The claimant must be able to articulate a duty of care imposed by law which the defendant has breached. Breaching a duty may subject an individual to liability in tort. Duty of care can be known as the responsibilities of an individual held towards another individual in society. Duty of care cannot really be defined by law; however it will often develop through the jurisprudence of common law. An example would be doctors. Doctors will be held reasonable standards for members of their profession, rather than those of the general public in cases related to them. In cases of landowners in common law, is the extent of their duty of care to those who came on their premises. ...read more.


The rule that you are to love your neighbour becomes in law you must not injure your neighbour; and the lawyer's question: Who is my neighbour? Receives a restricted reply. You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour. Who, then, in law, is my neighbour? The answer seems to be - persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in contemplation as being so affected when I am directing my mind to the acts or omissions that are called in question".(www.wikipedia.org/wiki/donoghue) Lord Atkin applied this neighbour test to the case that is where an established duty of care does not already exist, a person will own a duty of are not to injure those who it can be reasonably foreseen would be affected by their acts or omissions. The act of this case was to provide individuals with a remedy against suppliers of consumer products. In 1978 Lord Atkins' neighbour test was revised and applied Ann's v Merton London's Borough Council. From this developed the two stage test. Also known as 'Ann's test.' This two stage test requires; - a sufficient relationship of proximity based upon forseeability - And considerations of reasons why there should not be a duty of care. Then later on in 1990 Lord Atkins speech was referred to and applied in Caparo v Dickman. ...read more.


- The danger is one which it is reasonable to expect the occupier to protect against. This 1984 act offers less protection than the OLA 1957 act. Exclusion clauses. An exclusion clause is a term that seeks to limit the liability of one or of another party in a contract. It is acts that are used to defend parties for consequences of Breach of Contract and negligence. This is encase there is some problem with performance of the contract. The phrase 'limitation clause' is often used for a clause that limits, rather than excludes, liability. Certain conditions must be met for the exclusion clause to be enforceable; - It must be incorporated in the contract, - Its meaning must be clear - It must not be prevented by statute - The contract must remain intact that the clause still has some legal force. The defence of exclusion of liability is covered under s 2(1) of the occupier's liability act 1957. It states that ' an occupier of premises owes the same common duty of care to all his visitors except in so far as he is free to extend, restrict, modify or exclude his duty to any visitor or visitors.' This arises when the defendant has a sign up clearly stating that the person may enter the property, however at their own risk and if they were to substain injuries then they would not be able to recover damage they have suffered whilst on the land as there was a sign up telling them that it is at their own risk. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Law of Tort section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Law of Tort essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Discuss the extent to which discrimination is prohibited under English and Welsh law (25 ...

    5 star(s)

    taxation, inheritance and property. Example of direct discrimination include: Gill v El Vino (1983) where they wouldn't serve a woman because she was a female. And James v Eastleigh Borough Council (1990) where two elderly people where treated differently at a swimming pool because one was female and one was male.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Questions related to the tort of negligence.

    3 star(s)

    Occupier's liability is defined by the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 and the Occupiers Liability Act 1984. It is the common duty of care owed by an occupier to a lawful visitor to make sure that they are reasonably safe during their stay, and the duty owed to trespassers to make sure that there is not any outstanding danger(s)

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Homicide Act 1957

    3 star(s)

    Two types of intention need to be discussed - Direct intention refers to the direct aim or purpose of a D's act, Oblique or indirect intention is where the D does not have a direct aim or purpose but is aware that harm is virtually certain.

  2. Consider the meaning and importance of fault-based liability in English law

    The defendant will not be found to be at fault if they have taken reasonable steps to avoid damage occurring, which meet the standards of care that an ordinary and reasonable person would take. The concept of fault is also central to criminal law, for example at trial the prosecution

  1. Discuss the meaning of fault on the basis for criminal liability. Explain and evaluate ...

    As for shopkeepers, it can also be argued that shopkeepers can only take so much care. They cannot control their employees' actions all the time, and a mistake is bound to happen. In respect of individual liability, Vicarious liability can also be held to be unfair, as it puts fault upon the employer.


    'servitudes' are rights of third parties that exist over land, e.g. rights to light, rights to support, rights of way, rights to graze animals, fishing rights, etc.). Private nuisance, as can be seen, can be further subdivided into two categories: Indirect interference causing material damage Such as, smoke, gas, heat, vibrations, and Roots (of trees).

  1. In this report, the differences between contractual liability and tortuous liability are explained. In ...

    Tort of negligence Negligence is a failure to exercise the care that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in like circumstances (Encyclopedia Britannica, Meriam Webster). The area of tort law known as negligence involves harm caused by carelessness, not intentional harm.

  2. Tort law assignment. Brian fell against the standard of care a reasonable man would ...

    would rely on that skill. In Mutual Life and Citizens Assurance v Evatt 1971 it was held that there would only be a duty of care if the party giving advice held himself out as being in the business of giving the advice in question.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work